With 18,000lbs of fuel and 5000 lbs of weapons it’ll still be clean. Why WOULDN’T it be faster? Put 18,000lbs of fuel and 5000 lbs of weapons on a Typhoon,or Rafale and how much crap under the wings does that translate to?

True and now reduce its fuel load to that of the F-15 or Typhoon and out 8 AAMs on it and lets see if it can still fly faster, I doubt so.

I think is is an accurate and fair statement; but people do not read it with atention: the key words are combat-configurated! While a clean EF or even a clean F 16 would outmaneuver, outclimb and outacelerate an F 35, a combat-configured F 35 will do better than a similar EF or F 16.

In some configurations maybe but not necessarily in all. Can a F-35 carry 8 AAMs still achieve mach 1.8 or supercruise? Comparisons should be fair. Comparing a F-35 with 4 internal AAMs (just to keep the clean argument) with a fighter with 8 AAMs or so is not a fair comparison.

I didn’t said that I read those here; but the other poster said that the F 35 wasn’t tested in real war. I reply that the EF wasn’t either. Still people have no trouble to believe whatever EF consortium claims (or Russians for that matter), while in the same time labeling as a marketing BS whatever LM, AF or F 35 test pilots say.

Well the Typhoon or any other new aircraft like the Rafale or F-22 have proven themself during various exercises/evaluations. This gives at least an indication, the F-35 has yet to pass such tests/exercises. I personally think the F-35 will prove itself as well. Given LMs experience and the importance of that project for the US military, but also for its partners, it is unlikely that the F-35 will be a failure. I don’t think people “doubt” what a F-35 test pilot says about his aircraft, but you have to put things in relation and a lot of marketing claims from LM are directly copy pasted and taken for granted without prove. On the other side the very same people want to blame others for not being able to “prove” their claims, while themselfs can’t do it either.

Example:

the F-35 aerodynamically outperforms all other combat-configured 4th generation aircraft in top-end speed, loiter, subsonic acceleration and combat radius.

This is a statement of LM some people here seem to take it for granted though not a single detail is given. No data, nothing…

Personally, I have to disagree on that point. As a matter of fact the whole point is a clean F-35 with internal Weapons and Fuel offers performance advantages vs 4 & 4.5 Generation Fighters that cannot………Hardly, classifed material.

Yet exact data are missing for comparison.

Perfect example:

the F-35 aerodynamically outperforms all other combat-configured 4th generation aircraft in top-end speed, loiter, subsonic acceleration and combat radius.

Where is the prove with any axact data? Nowhere so far its just a marketing claim which might be more or less true. Factual data are missing!

No, the misunderstanding lies in just because the F-35 is not designed to supercruise like the F-22 that it DOES NOT mean that it is not capable of supercrising (in the sense that a number of 4th generation fighers can supercruise).

I sure as hell am NOT ignoring the importance of aerodynamics, I just happen to know JUST enough about aerodynamics (& have read comments from those I know know more than I do) to know that the aerodynamics of the F-35 are better than its naysayers are implying. They say it is a “fat pig”, well guess what then the F-22 is a “fat pig” yet it can SUPERCRUISE at Mach 1.72.

Understand what you mean. I don’t exclude the possibility of supercruise for the F-35 given its small size and high thrust, but I wouldn’t hold my breath on that. I’m sure we’ll hear about it earlier or later.
BTW the F-22 appears much less fat. They crammed similar stuff in a significant larger airframe.

While uninstalled specific thurst alone doesn’t tell you enough about supersonic or altitude performance it DOES tell you about potential. Just read the comments from the F-35 test pilots, they are contually have to throttle back too keep it from flying too fast & the chase planes often have to touch the afterburner took keep up.

Well that’s in a specific regime (subsonic and not at large altitudes). That LM gives typical operating altitude between 33k and 40k ft might an indicator that the performance won’t be that bad at altitude.

Yes OEW. To aircraft manufactures & operators pure physical empty weight is all but meaningless.

Sources say everything from, 28,000 lbs to 29,000 for the F-15C but MOST (& the most credible) say 28,600 lbs OEW.

So it can be said that the F-35 weights as much as the F-35. But that comparison is basically apples and oranges given the fact how extremly effective the space in the F-35 is used.

Prove what? That the F-35 is SIGNIFICANTLY smaller in every way than the F-15 & that everything except wing sweep angle is more aerodynamic on the F-35.

You yet lack the data to support that claim.

But a CLEAN F-35 is less draggy than its 4th generation “competetors” with external stores (weapons & drop tanks). The F-35 is a model of aerodynamic & space efficiency. I carries as much fuel as a F-15 with one 600 gal drop tank PLUS two 2,000 lb JDAM & 2 AMRAAM internally in an aircraft the size of a Rafale!

True and fully agreed

Nobody is saying that the F-35 is going to be an ubber supersonic performer. What IS unreasonable however is to assume that it won’t be a supersonic performer. Again, we are talking about an aircraft about the size of a Rafale (a bit “bulkier”) but with the dry thrust of an F-15C (or only about 1,000 lbs less dry thrust than an F-16C Black 50/52 at full afterburner).

I think that is where the misunderstanding lies. Nobody says the F-35 won’t be supersonic capable, but people understand that its supersonic performance is for sure sufficient for the F-35s missions, but likely to be inferior to other, more optimised designs. That is however countered with arguments like internal fuel and weapons carriage which is of course somewhat true, but you guys do also ignore the importance of the aerodynamics and the fact that raw uninstalled specific thurst doesn’t tell you anything about supersonic or altitude performance.

Yes heavier. The operational empty weight of the F-15C is about 2,000 lbs more than the F-35A, the F-15E (probably a more fair comparision being a mutli-role fighter-bomber like the F-35 rather than a pure fighter & with a MUCH closer fuel fraction) about 5,000 lbs more.

Are the weight figures for the F-35 OEW? As I understand it it’s just the empty weight. And according data about the F-15C I have its EW (not OEW) is 28160 lb.

By any measure, even a clean F-15 is less aerodynamic than a F-35.

And the prove is? Don’t get me wrong, but you guys on one site complain about how could we know that other aircraft are more aerodynamic, while the other way round you claim the opposite in the very same way!

You missed the point, 4th generation fighters are being (or soon will be) fitted with CFTs because they need to carry more fuel than they can internally & CFTs are MORE effecient than drop tanks. And having enough internal fuel capacity is more effecient than even CFTs.

I perfectly know this, what I’m referring to is that the F-35 is definitely draggier by that in a clean configuration. Whether that’s important for operations or not, but that’s the way it is.

Exactly, but just because the F-35 does not appear sleak does not mean that it isn’t. Sure it isn’t a F-104, but it ain’t no F-4 either.[/QUOTE]

You aren’t going to see any actual numbers for the F-35 for some time. For now all we REALLY have is the REQUIREMENTS.

KPP threshold
F-35A: combat radius >590nm (range >1,200nm)
F-35B: combat radius >450nm (range >900nm)
F-35C: combat radius >600nm (range >1,200nm)

The Jan 2008 Program Overview shows all three exceeding these KPP thresholds.

These values are known to me. As said I wait for more accurate data in the future. These ranges don’t look impressive given the huge amount of internal fuel, but let’s wait and see.

Yeah, even the B has something like 13,500 internal (’bout the same as an F-15C as I recall).

According the programme brief the F-35B has 14000 lb, F-15C has ~13500 lb as you thought.